Massachusetts General Laws
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 94C, § 40 (2026)
Conspiracy
✓ text as last checked Sept. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MAmalegislature.gov (official)
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Section 40. Whoever conspires with another person to violate any provision of this chapter shall be punished by imprisonment or fine, or both, which punishment shall not exceed the maximum punishment prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 103
cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: United States v. Bryant, 571 F.3d 147 (1st Cir. 2009).
United States v. Bryant, 571 F.3d 147 (1st Cir. 2009). “In 1992, Bryant was initially charged with one count of trafficking in cocaine in violation of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 94C, § 32E(b)(1), and one count of conspiracy to violate the drug laws of the Commonwealth (specifically, to traffic in cocaine) in violation of Mass.”
Commonwealth v. Pratt, 555 N.E.2d 559 (Mass. 1990). “Pratt to possess a class B controlled substance, methaqualone, with intent to distribute, in violation of G. L. c. 94C, § 40 (1988 ed.); of possession of a class A controlled substance, heroin, with intent to distribute, in violation of G.”
Commonwealth v. Frazier, 571 N.E.2d 1356 (Mass. 1991). “), [2] and for conspiracy to traffic in cocaine, pursuant to G.L.c. 94C, § 40 (1988 ed.). Both Frazier and Johnson filed motions to suppress.”
Commonwealth v. Cawthron, 97 N.E.3d 671 (Mass. 2018). “94C, § 32E ( c ) (1), and conspiracy to traffic Oxycodone, in violation of G. L. c. 94C, § 40. The defendants filed motions to suppress statements made to detectives and pills found in one of the defendants' vehicles, arguing that they had been subject to custodial interrogation…”
Commonwealth v. Rodriguez, 37 N.E.3d 611 (Mass. 2015). “94C, § 32A (a),5 conspiracy to violate the drugs laws under G. L. c. 94C, § 40, and a drug violation near a school or park under G.”
Commonwealth v. Funches, 397 N.E.2d 1097 (Mass. 1979). “3 The prosecution objected on the ground that a response might require the witness to incriminate himself for conspiracy to violate the narcotic drug laws, G. L. c. 94C, § 40. The judge appointed counsel for Smith.”
Pixley v. Commonwealth, 906 N.E.2d 320 (Mass. 2009). “94C, § 32J; and conspiracy to violate the drug laws in violation of G. L. c. 94C, § 40. The same grand jury returned indictments against Gillum charging violations of G.”
Commonwealth v. Deagle, 409 N.E.2d 1347 (Mass. App. Ct. 1980). “The latter found the defendant guilty as charged; and counsel were still debating, as late as the time of sentencing, precisely what section of the Controlled Substances Act the jury had found the defendant guilty of conspiring to violate a question of controlling significance…”
Commonwealth v. Washington, 869 N.E.2d 605 (Mass. 2007). “The defendant also was charged with one count of conspiracy to violate the controlled substances act, G. L. c. 94C, § 40, and the codefendant was charged with two such counts.”
Commonwealth v. Cantres, 540 N.E.2d 149 (Mass. 1989). “94C [Controlled Substances Act], to wit: Distribution of Heroin, in violation of G. L. c. 94C, § 40.” A grand jury subsequently indicted the defendant.”
Commonwealth v. Stoico, 699 N.E.2d 1249 (Mass. App. Ct. 1998). “Steven Stoico was convicted by a jury of six in the District Court of conspiring to distribute marihuana, see G. L. c. 94C, § 40, and sentenced to serve two years in a house of correction.”
Commonwealth v. Mubdi, 923 N.E.2d 1004 (Mass. 2010). “94C, § 34, and of conspiracy to violate the drug laws, in violation of G. L. c. 94C, § 40, were dismissed at the request of the Commonwealth.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.